Then we know we would hear the real questions everyone wants asked. Not these softball questions like you get on youtube, or CNN, or NPR or any of the other liberal outlets. Then we could have a real debate with someone we know would get to the root of the question.
2007-07-31 06:49:09 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
how about a bipartisan group of moderators? each of them feeding off of each others' questions and using logical segues from one topic to the next, not the ones the candidates choose to set the agenda for the evening.
have each candidate in the debate select three potential moderators, and the five with the highest number of votes would get together and ask the 'real' questions as you put it, not the questions the 'real' people were asking on the cnn/youtube debate.
or maybe that's where your problem lies?
2007-08-01 10:29:42 · answer #1 · answered by patzky99 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Fox might desire to have in basic terms accomplished a narrative in this because of the fact approximately 5 human beings asked an identical question on an identical time!! OMFG! And in case you have a topic with the determination, talk with McCain's marketing campaign workplaces. they have a suitable to refuse any moderator and Gwen has been working in this e book approximately minorities and balloting(it is not approximately Senator Obama) for an prolonged time. that they had their hazard to bail out and the did not. I actually have a topic with the Republican Tom Brokaw moderating, yet Senator Obama does not, so i'm coolllllll with it.
2016-10-13 05:52:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Rush would be just as bad as some of the Liberal moderators we have now, just leaning in the other direction. Besides, politicians practice making a segue from the subject they are asked about but don't want to respond to, to a subject they feel will get them votes. So unless a moderator can force the candidates to answer the questions that are asked, of what use is any mod, no matter what affiliation.
2007-07-31 07:03:16 · answer #3 · answered by SteveA8 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Wow! That would be awesome! Maybe Rush could pop a few pills beforehand and take control of the debates! Then he could do his best Hitler impersonation and convince some of America's 'ditto heads' that it's 'acceptable' to insult, injure or even kill liberals, or anyone else who doesn't agree with Rush's perspectives. It could be a grand repeat of Hitler's propaganda when he convinced some of Germany's most prominent people that it was 'acceptable' to gas six million Jews! Limbaugh is a hate-filled, vulgar, bigoted Republican mouthpiece, a part of the nauseating conservative-biased media. Somebody should put a gag order on him before he divides this country even further than he already has. -RKO- 07/31/07
2007-07-31 07:10:57 · answer #4 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Yeah, Rush would be great because he would ask the hard questions. That YouTube broadcast was ridiculous. I guess they think the American people are extra stupid. We all know those questions were written by the DNC and the candidates (at least some of them) had the questions ahead of time to prepare an answer. If not Rush, I would just appreciate someone that is truly non-partisan. I don't wat CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, or NBC any more. I can't stand the Liberal Bias. In fact, I don't watch the Weather Channel anymore either. I am sick of them ragging about Global Warming and Bush. Enough already. What they don't realize is they are probably just going to push the "independent" right over to the Republican side.
2007-07-31 06:55:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Rush couldn't run a debate with a map and step-by-step directions.
What makes you think he wouldn't cave to the same things that all of the others cave to? After all, he needs to remain employed to pay all of those docs for the meds, doesn't he???
2007-07-31 07:43:50 · answer #6 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nah, he's not exactly the best moderator I can think of. I know he has a right to his opinion, but he gets overly opinionated often. Sometimes at other people's expense, including his notorious ripping of Michael J. Fox while on-air.
2007-07-31 06:58:26 · answer #7 · answered by Ultra 1 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes, so Hillary could demolish the bum for once and for all. And then Obama could call him a lying cracker. And then Richardson could call him a lying gringo. And then Biden could say, "Finally, somebody with worse hair than me!" And then Kucinich could say, "Morally, you're much smaller than I am." And then Edwards could roll over and play dead like he did against Cheney.
The band Rush? Aren't they Canadian? They don't even vote in our elections!
2007-07-31 07:23:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
This is so true!!! Rush would give it to them hard and i for damn sure would be applauding him! He would get straight to the point and get the job done, thats for sure!!!
The only reason why people hate Rush is becuz he is HARDCORE! and speaks the honest truth! unlike most of those bigots running for president...they say what u want to hear and then once they win, what do ya know, they do the exact opposite...dont you people ever learn?
*shakes head*
2007-07-31 08:02:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You mean framed questions like "How many of the prostitutes you slept with did you secretly murder?" Rush is more biased than ANY liberal source. You would not get any fair questions from that hypocrite elitist.
2007-07-31 07:12:54 · answer #10 · answered by Frank 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋